If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Wow...fish. Unless you are going to purchase this foal your recommendation is unfounded. Breeding is not gambling, or at least it isn't supposed to be. What you are suggesting is gambling, and not sound advice. She is already prepared to give her away to someone else, why would you make another unwanted horse.

Are you breeding her or giving her to a breeder? I am a little confused on that. If you got a great offer and vetted the breeder well, I would be unlikely to turn down a great home due to her lack of papers if the person was established and reputable I guess.

However... I think the mares Kinsella and other posters referred to are proven show mares. What has your mare done and at what level? Makes way more sense to breed a proven performer without papers than the mare down the street.
*

A lonnnnnng time ago, yes. You don't see anyone NOW starting from scratch trying to reinvent the Thoroughbred using grade mares. That's the major flaw in fish's argument. Sure, grade and unregistered stock may have been used in the development of warmbloods, but that was many years and generations ago, it's not a modern accepted breeding practice. Again, why reinvent the wheel or go all the way back to the beginning? And the cavalier disregard for genetics and throwbacks etc is simply, wow.

Just to throw my 2 cents' worth in... Actually, there are warmblood registries that will allow grade or unregistered mares in their books. Albeit the lowest book, but they're still sometimes allowed. And then based on what the mare throws, she can sometimes "move up".

I am in no way saying yes or no as to whether the OP's mare in question should be bred, just stating that there are still many modern examples of grade, unregistered or unknown parentage mares being crossbred and their offspring are registered with a quality registry.

A lonnnnnng time ago, yes. You don't see anyone NOW starting from scratch trying to reinvent the Thoroughbred using grade mares. That's the major flaw in fish's argument. Sure, grade and unregistered stock may have been used in the development of warmbloods, but that was many years and generations ago, it's not a modern accepted breeding practice. Again, why reinvent the wheel or go all the way back to the beginning? And the cavalier disregard for genetics and throwbacks etc is simply, wow.

Does it not occur to you that there might still be (and in fact ARE) people who are not trying to "reinvent" anything when they breed-- but maybe do something similar to what TB and WB breeders did years ago-- i.e. breed with their own purposes in mind-- e.g. produce kid's ponies, field (and show) hunters.... any number of kinds of horses for which there ARE jobs, demand-- but no real need for registration???

When the TB was invented, the goal was not to create a breed, but to breed horses that would win races. When it was thought that the fastest horses possible were being bred from specific lines, the book was closed-- and later reopened when the offspring of a horse from partially unknown lines started beating the ones with full papers. I'm one of many who thinks it would probably benefit the breed to reopen the book if other horses, perhaps of unknown breeding, were found who could out run registered TB's at classic distances (which have themselves evolved considerably since the breed's foundation).

Breeding is every bit as much gambling as poker and betting on races. The wise gambler studies and knows the odds, risks, variables, but the outcome is never known until the race is run, cards are dealt and played, the die have been cast. Highly skilled gamblers can and often do become very successful (i.e. rich) professionals, but that doesn't mean that what they do isn't gambling.

Certainly people on this forum know that every breeding is a matter of "rolling the genetic dice"-- with many characteristics of the offspring influenced as much by environment (even in utero) as genetics anyway???

Meantime, the actual characteristics of any offspring are influenced not at all-- zilch-- by registration/papers. Properly used, registration papers are just one of many possible sources of information which can be useful in trying to calculate risks.

to the OP: i think your mare looks like a nice candidate for sport pony breeding. If she were mine i would think about breeding her to a Connemara.... she looks like she has a nice hind end and a decent jump.

If you breed her to a full bred pony of some sort (connemara, Welsh) then her offspring can be registered half bred.

Wow, lots of input. And considering how opinionated people are on this topic, its staying relatively civil.

I was not planning on breeding her myself, but then started to consider it as time went on. I'm not "looking for encouragement for something I know I should not do," I am looking for opinions on the ethics involved, as well as the individual mare. I did add two older free jumping pics where you can see her bascule, knees, etc and in my opinion she jumps quite nicely. She is not built uphill, but I don't see that as a requirement for a hunter like it is in dressage. And I've grown up riding and working around some very nice A circuit hunters over the years (Strapless, Eye Remember Rio, and a bunch more) so I'm not totally ignorant My girl has her strengths and weaknesses - she's balanced, moves well, has a natural lead change, round pretty jump (check out the little pic of her jumping poles with hay pallet standards), but she also has a low set neck, her pasterns could be a little longer, and it certainly wouldn't hurt if she was more uphill. Any other educated opinions, good or bad, I'm open to hearing!

I do have one bone to pick. There was mention of why would I create another horse when I already have one I can't give away. That's a very unfair statement! The mare is older, can't be ridden without bute anymore, and was worth something when she was younger. It's not like she's 7 years old and sound and I can't give her away... hell, I've known ex grand priz horses and A circuit winners who couldn't find homes after they could only be lightly ridden. Geez.

Just to throw my 2 cents' worth in... Actually, there are warmblood registries that will allow grade or unregistered mares in their books. Albeit the lowest book, but they're still sometimes allowed. And then based on what the mare throws, she can sometimes "move up".

I am in no way saying yes or no as to whether the OP's mare in question should be bred, just stating that there are still many modern examples of grade, unregistered or unknown parentage mares being crossbred and their offspring are registered with a quality registry.

The Irish Draught Horse Society (NA) will register horses with a sufficient percentage of RID blood and they can be inspected and approved as RIDSH's. The R means approved

I wasn't always a Smurf
Penmerryl's Sophie RIDSH
"I ain't as good as I once was but I'm as good once as I ever was"
The ignore list is my friend. It takes 2 to argue.

Breeding is every bit as much gambling as poker and betting on races. The wise gambler studies and knows the odds, risks, variables, but the outcome is never known until the race is run, cards are dealt and played, the die have been cast. Highly skilled gamblers can and often do become very successful (i.e. rich) professionals, but that doesn't mean that what they do isn't gambling.Certainly people on this forum know that every breeding is a matter of "rolling the genetic dice"-- with many characteristics of the offspring influenced as much by environment (even in utero) as genetics anyway???

fish, I'm guessing you're the one who gave me a "thumbs down" since you seem to disagree with me regarding the importance of genetics, understanding the risk of throwbacks, and so forth.

I agree with you to a point -- breeding is a gamble. BUT... I think responsible breeders minimize the gamble as much as possible by being as careful and educated as possible -- and when I say educated, I mean educated about breeding in general, but also educated about the individuals being used for breeding. The more you know about the stallion and the mare you'll be breeding, the more you can "stack the deck" in your favor.

Sticking to your gambling example, it's like how anyone can play Blackjack -- whether you can hardly add two numbers together, or whether you're a math whiz and you've memorized the odds/strategies backwards and forwards -- anyone can play. But the players in the latter group are more likely to win than the players in the former group. Breeding is similar, the more you know, the more likely you are to be successful.

So I respect much of what you've said here, but we disagree about the wisdom of using grade mares for breeding. And I think saying "all breeding is a gamble" trivializes the vast research and homework many breeders do in their quest to breed quality horses, responsibly.

fish, I'm guessing you're the one who gave me a "thumbs down" since you seem to disagree with me regarding the importance of genetics, understanding the risk of throwbacks, and so forth.

I agree with you to a point -- breeding is a gamble. BUT... I think responsible breeders minimize the gamble as much as possible by being as careful and educated as possible -- and when I say educated, I mean educated about breeding in general, but also educated about the individuals being used for breeding. The more you know about the stallion and the mare you'll be breeding, the more you can "stack the deck" in your favor.

Sticking to your gambling example, it's like how anyone can play Blackjack -- whether you can hardly add two numbers together, or whether you're a math whiz and you've memorized the odds/strategies backwards and forwards -- anyone can play. But the players in the latter group are more likely to win than the players in the former group. Breeding is similar, the more you know, the more likely you are to be successful.

So I respect much of what you've said here, but we disagree about the wisdom of using grade mares for breeding. And I think saying "all breeding is a gamble" trivializes the vast research and homework many breeders do in their quest to breed quality horses, responsibly.

I guess I'm about to get another thumbs down (sorry!)

I don't do thumbs down-- and wish they'd get rid of the things.

And I've not trivialized any of the research people do in preparation for breeding-- I do a helluva lot of it myself-- some of which led me to breed my (premium) mare to a then unapproved stallion (Cunningham) in 2002 to produce a (supposedly) unregisterable foal. I took a lot of flack on these boards for my decision at the time, but have never regretted it for a second. IMO, people who equate breeding outside registry rules with not being "educated about breeding in general" are pretty obviously "trivializing" the work of those whose own experience and research have led them in different, but often far from "uneducated" directions. There have long been and still are many highly educated breeders in this country who are not at all adverse to breeding unpapered horses if other factors (e.g., conformation, performance, what is known of bloodlines....) "stack the deck" in their favor. I see nothing wrong with this. Meantime, you insult a great many fine horsepeople and breeders-- especially in the h/j world-- by equating such people with Blackjack players who "can hardly add two numbers together--" not to mention demonstrating your failure to read my post carefully. E.g., what do you think I was referring to when I wrote of highly successful professional gamblers studying the odds, etc., etc. if not the necessity of study/education to guard against losing one's shirt in gambling of any stripe, including breeding??

To illustrate where I'm coming from on this issue of breeding unregistered mares to produce sport horses, I like to recall a USDF seminar with Hilda Gurney I attended several years ago. In one session, she evaluated 3 mares as sport horse breeding prospects: a registered TB mare, an unregistered Anglo-Arab, and a branded Hanoverian. The first two she described as "elegant, of excellent type," and said she would not hesitate to breed either. The WB, however, was coarse, incorrect, ill proportioned... so Hilda said she would not breed her whether she was approved for breeding or not. As fate would have it, the WB mare was in foal at the time. The other two were (I think unfortunately) never bred.

Seems to me that that's the sort of thing that is all too likely to happen when people place paper/approvals above the quality of the individuals in front of them, and stridently condemn people willing to take chances on grade/unregistered horses regardless of the quality of the individuals or what they might have to contribute to sport.